WEBB VS RITZ AT STANFORD 10k SUNDAY

Will simply point out the complete fallacy of one point of your arguments - Ritz is as talented as webb at their respective distance. Not true. Webb has run 3.48 and is a legitimate threat to run sub 3.30 a time which may win him a medal at a major global event. The absolute fastest Ritz will run (i dont even think he will run this) is low 12.50s and low 26.50s. If he runs these times he will be ranked top 10 in the world but he will not win a medal at a major games which are sometimes won in 12.50 with a blistering last k. Before you cite mottram as a mid 12.50's runner who has been successful he is a sub 3.50 miler which Ritz i hope you can admit certainly is not.

wow saying if someone has more talent or not. now THAT was a waste of a post. sicne we all know (and you even said this 5 pages back) that has little bearing on how they will run years from now, which is what matters most isn't? it seems you can't yourself come up with anything provoking.

interesting? wrote:

wow saying if someone has more talent or not. now THAT was a waste of a post. sicne we all know (and you even said this 5 pages back) that has little bearing on how they will run years from now, which is what matters most isn't? it seems you can't yourself come up with anything provoking.

1) Performance is what matters most, of course.

2) Who said I wanted to come up with anything provoking? If I wanted to be provoking, I'd say everyone in the US sucks compared to Ritz, and that not only will he one day OWN the AR in the 5,000 and 10,000, but also the marathon. Now THAT would be provoking! For those of you who don't exactly know the definition of provoking, see www-m-w.com.

so you admit you are boring. excellent.

People forget that two years ago Webb made the World Cross team at 12K. Granted, a number of the horses weren't in the race due to the Oly Trials marathon, but still impressive nonetheless. I can't think of any other "miler" that ever did that. That was '04, Webb's real "breakout" year internationally. Since then he's cut about 20 seconds off of his 5,000 PR, run 8:11 and even after those gains, the word on the street is that his mileage is about 15% higher to boot. I would thoroughly expect that, even with everyone in the race, Webb would be right in the hunt to make a 12K World Cross team today, something that even many very good "distance" runners in this country couldn't do, and they don't have 3:48 mile PR's to boot.

I understand the Webb camp thinks he can run 27:45. They usually have a pretty good bead on his fitness. I won't be surprised by anything between 27:40 (given his apparent fitness) and 28:30 (given that it's his first 10,000). Green with envy of anyone that gets to see this race.

I think it's also very apparent that Webb is preparing for his future as a 1500/5,000 runner, a la Aouita, El G, etc. I'm confident that this year -- an open year with no WCs or Olys, which won't happen again until 2010 -- is the year they are taking to evaluate where they'll focus in the WC and Oly years of '07, '08 and '09, when Webb will be in the prime of his career. Mix it up this year and evaluate the results to see which event holds the best medal prospects for him in those years. Once again, this is extremely good planning on the part of the Webb team. I have always been very, very impressed with how well they think and plan ahead, and this is but one more example of that. If Webb is going to be able to run competitively at 5,000 in the WCs, Olys, Grand Prix and Golden League, he should be able to run a very solid 10,000 coming out his base work. I can remember even an 800/1500 guy like Steve Cram running 10K road races in around 30:00 in the late winter/early spring.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Enjoy the ride as a fan. This is a very, very special athlete.

ttc wrote:

Actually the 13:10 could be an argument against Webb. That's a ways away from 3:48, and even 8:11 (quality-wise).

Well, as of mid-1981, the world records were 3:48 for the mile and 13:08 for the 5000m. So how is a 13:10 "a ways away" from 3:48, quality-wise?

Spartacus wrote:

ttc wrote:

Actually the 13:10 could be an argument against Webb. That's a ways away from 3:48, and even 8:11 (quality-wise).

Well, as of mid-1981, the world records were 3:48 for the mile and 13:08 for the 5000m. So how is a 13:10 "a ways away" from 3:48, quality-wise?

Actually his, mile, two-mile and 5,000 are almost dead-on equivalents under Purdy. No loss moving up to 5,000 at all.

FWIW, the Purdy equivalent of his 5,000 is ~27:30.

Zat0pek wrote:

Actually his, mile, two-mile and 5,000 are almost dead-on equivalents under Purdy. No loss moving up to 5,000 at all.

Webb's 3:48 could seriously compete all but 1-2 1500m races ever. His 13:10 didn't even do so in that race. 13:10 is a much longer ways away from Bekele's WR, than the 3:48 to El G's, even considering the longer distance. Also remember that Ian Dobson ran 13:15. No offense to him, but Dobson is not close to being a 3:48 equivalent.

I'm not exactly into equivalency charts, but what actually happens.

IAAF-List 2005

1500m

3:32.52 #12

5000m

13:10.86 #38

5000m

#12 12:58.43 Boniface Kiprop

Exactly. Last 2 posts prove my point.

Hall ran 3:42.70 just weeks after graduating from high school.

You mean to tell me that's not a measure of a very high level of talent?

Spartacus wrote:

Well, as of mid-1981, the world records were 3:48 for the mile and 13:08 for the 5000m. So how is a 13:10 "a ways away" from 3:48, quality-wise?

I'll handle that one:

IT'S NOT 1981 ANYMORE.

(that was pretty simple, eh?)

But seriously, while I see your point, plucking out 1981 and using it as a barometer is not really fair. 81 was the year Coe/Ovett made all those assualts on the mile record, and it was an impressive record they achieved. Not as many people were assualting the 4k record and it remained someone static. By 82, the mile record was 3:47 and the 5k 13:00. So even using '82 as a barometer, Webb's pr would be 1 second of the mile record of that year, and TEN seconds off the 5k. Now yes, it should absolutley be considered that Webb has only run one international 5k, and can take off more time, but still, he is certainly closer to being near the best in the world in the mile than the 5k right now-

* Very realistically, Webb could run a low 3:30 1500m this year. Let's say, 3:30.5 . And last year, only THREE runners in the world ran faster than that. In '04, only FIVE runners in the world ran faster than that..

* Now lets look at the 5k: I also think he could realistically run 13:00 flat 5k this year ( a much bigger improvement for him, but doable). But SEVENTEEN runners broke that time last year, and TWELVE the year before.

So clearly his chances at medaling in the 1500 right now are still way ahead of his 5k chances. But maybe that will change. And becoming a better 5k runner should only help in the 1500 anyway. I think it is great he is doing the 10k.

I think all those equivalency tables are now null and void when you see people coming through 3k only 5-10 seconds slower than they raced it open. People used to talk about 4 seconds per lap as you move up in distance. still works up to 3000 but past that not working.

800 WR is 50.5

1500 WR is 54.9(4.4)

3000 WR is 58.6(3.7)

5000 WR is 60.5(1.9)

10K WR is 62.8(2.3) I guess the point of all this is that Webb's 5k time means nothing nowadays where as his Mile time is legit top 5-10 in teh world.

Sir Lance-alot wrote:

So clearly his chances at medaling in the 1500 right now are still way ahead of his 5k chances.

Your conclusion assumes that the person who has run the fastest time of the year will win the championship race at the end of the season. Not necessarily. Olympic and World Championship finals are especially tactical.

Mottram won bronze at 5,000 last year even though he only ran the 10th fastest time of the year. Ramzi won gold in the 800 even though his 800 time was only 7th fastest for the year.

If it comes down a blazing last lap after a mostly pedestrian race, I like Webb's odds against 5,000 runners rather than his odds against milers.

Webb's average split per distance PR:

800m PR: 1:46.53 -----> 53.27 sec/400m

} 3.40 sec

1500m PR: 3:32.52 -----> 56.67 sec/400m

} 4.56 sec

3000m PR: 7:39.28 -----> 61.23 sec/400m

} 2.04 sec

5000m PR: 13:10.86 ------> 63.27 sec/400m

what people come through the 3k split of a 5k a few seconds off their 3k best time? if they actually do that, chances are their 3000m PR is weak since they didnt run it a whole lot. look at bekele, does anyone really believe his 3k PR is only 7:31 or whatever it is? come on. mapping from a commonly run event to a less commonly one is a fallacy.

I know. I did not cite bekele as an example.

But to go back to 1980 3k record was 7.32 and 5k recrod was 13.06(7.51 at 3k)- difference of 19 seconds.

Todays 3k world record is 7.20 and 5k world record is 12.37 (7.33 at 3k) - difference of 13 seconds.

At the elite level people are getting so much stronger that they are able to come through far closer to their 3k max than was thought possible just 25 years ago.

I'm sure its the same with the 10k. ie todays WR is 5k WR x 2 + 60 secs. 25 years ago was 5k WR x 2 + 80 secs. Even taking into account percentages of WR it is still decreasing